The Unemployment Insurance Weekly Claims Report was released this morning for last week. The 367,000 new claims number was a 4,000 increase from the previous week's upward revision of 4,000. The less volatile and closely watched four-week moving average, which is a better indicator of the recent trend, is at 375,000, unchanged from the last week's 1,000 upward adjustment. Here is the official statement from the Department of Labor:

In the week ending September 29, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 367,000, an increase of 4,000 from the previous week's revised figure of 363,000. The 4-week moving average was 375,000, unchanged from the previous week's revised average.

Of yeah, also, anybody who thinks health care is not a human right is a Nazi sympathiser. My health is not for sale to the highest profiteer. Thats just bullshit.

Oh, so then anyone who thinks health care is a human right is a Jew sympathiser, and wants Iran bombed out of existance.

(Boy! Debating using Spacebrother's style is FUN!!)

I don't know if the Fox News is broadcast across the border on that side of the Great Lakes border, but the side most vocal about "poofing" Iran "out of existence" are the folks who think health care is a priveledge, and that corporations are people, and only they are entitled to live off of the government.

DB, I wrote about how the economy is for me and seperately the US in general.

That's not implied ANYWHERE in your initial post about this, which was partly what I was referring to. Here's that post:

The Forum Killed Arkay wrote:

BRAVO SIERRA wrote:

Hey twist the facts any way you want, bottom line how do ya like the economy now!!...

Well, if thats how you judge it, then I like it GREAT! 4 years ago I was laid off, now after a few twists and turns I have the best job I've ever had. My wife was laid off from a Navy Contractor a year ago and she just got a job that could turn into a career! Maybe you'd prefer a different example?

But if you say so...

The Forum Killed Arkay wrote:

For me, the economy is great, tor the US, the economy is getting better. 24 straight months of job growth and just today the unemployment rate went below 8%. I'm sure everyone would like it better still, but there is no getting around the fact that better is better.

I think you mean, slightly better.

And apart from the stats pedro2 just posted, the U-6 unemployment rate is still at 14.7%. And let's not forget about the 32 million Americans who were on food stamps 4 years ago...whereas now, 47 million of them are...

Ronald Noomies wrote:

The numbers are rigged. The polls are rigged. The media is rigged. The debate moderator was rigged even before the debate started. Libya is a cover up of a cover up. The fact checkers are rigged. The non-partisan CBO is rigged.

Anyone see a pattern?

Well, despite the good news, I do find it suspicious that the current job #s, which, all of a sudden happen to be the largest per month U-3 unemployment growth rate in NINE YEARS, also happen to be right before probably the most important US Presidential election in recent US history...

Of yeah, also, anybody who thinks health care is not a human right is a Nazi sympathiser. My health is not for sale to the highest profiteer. Thats just bullshit.

Oh, so then anyone who thinks health care is a human right is a Jew sympathiser, and wants Iran bombed out of existance.

(Boy! Debating using Spacebrother's style is FUN!!)

I don't know if the Fox News is broadcast across the border on that side of the Great Lakes border, but the side most vocal about "poofing" Iran "out of existence" are the folks who think health care is a priveledge, and that corporations are people, and only they are entitled to live off of the government.

The nazi party tried to eliminate all jews. Therefore, if you are not a nazi supporter, you must be a jew supporter.There are lots of jews in Israel, and Israel is gearing up to take out Iran, before Iran can take out Israel.Just using your logic in calling all people who disagree with you on health care nazi sympathisers. Your rules, not mine!

_________________You're probably wondering why I'm here(not that it makes a heck of a lot of a difference to ya)

DB -WTF? Look up the word 'implied'. Besides, it didn't need to be implied because its clear and you quoted it. This kind of pickiness is getting annoying.

'picky' might be better than 'pickled'. As bp may have implied with his article when a blacked out trader sold $520 million in contracts in one evening, causing our gas prices to shoot up $1.50/gallon overnight, July 2009...

Well, despite the good news, I do find it suspicious that the current job #s, which, all of a sudden happen to be the largest per month U-3 unemployment growth rate in NINE YEARS, also happen to be right before probably the most important US Presidential election in recent US history....

Come on Josh. You know better than to try to pull this far-right shit. There's not a hint of evidence that someone fiddled with the numbers. And it doesn't stand up to the any sort of smell test. No one cried about the numbers when they were above 8 all those years. No one accused Obama of purposefully staging a gradual decline in the numbers over the years. They will probably go back up next month anyway, and then what would you and the righties say? That Obama got scared of being caught so he fixed them higher again to avoid scrutiny?

7.8% is still damn high; isn't that enough?

_________________Everytime we picked a booger we'd flip it on this one winduh. Every night we'd contribute, 2, 3, 4 boogers. We had to use a putty knife, man, to get them damn things off the winduh. There was some goober ones that weren't even hard...

DB -WTF? Look up the word 'implied'. Besides, it didn't need to be implied because its clear and you quoted it. This kind of pickiness is getting annoying.

You must be joking? Here's the quote again...

The Forum Killed Arkay wrote:

BRAVO SIERRA wrote:

Hey twist the facts any way you want, bottom line how do ya like the economy now!!...

Well, if thats how you judge it, then I like it GREAT! 4 years ago I was laid off, now after a few twists and turns I have the best job I've ever had. My wife was laid off from a Navy Contractor a year ago and she just got a job that could turn into a career! Maybe you'd prefer a different example?

I know what the word "implied" means. So, I fail to see how your above quote, especially the bolded part, is separating what you implied or even said from each other?

I would HATE to think you're trying to weasel your way out of this, Arkay. And that sucks. I would NEVER want to put you in the same category as SPACEBROTHER...

Ronny's Noomies wrote:

Disco Boy wrote:

Well, despite the good news, I do find it suspicious that the current job #s, which, all of a sudden happen to be the largest per month U-3 unemployment growth rate in NINE YEARS, also happen to be right before probably the most important US Presidential election in recent US history....

Come on DB. You know better than to try to pull this far-right shit. There's not a hint of evidence that someone fiddled with the numbers. And it doesn't stand up to the any sort of smell test. No one cried about the numbers when they were above 8 all those years. No one accused Obama of purposefully staging a gradual decline in the numbers over the years. They will probably go back up next month anyway, and then what would you and the righties say? That Obama got scared of being caught so he fixed them higher again to avoid scrutiny?

7.8% is still damn high; isn't that enough?

"Far-right shit"?

ALL I'm saying is that it's suspicious. And I'd be saying the same damn thing if a Republican were currently in the White House...

And btw, if I was an American, generally speaking, I'd probably be registered as an Independent, or possibly Libertarian. About the only one on the "right" I have time for, is Ron Paul. And remember, he's liberal enough that nearly half of his support base are Democrats.

Oh...and here's a word from FZ on his virtual Libertarian Party endorsement in 1988...:

You do realize that most here and I am willing to say this is a pretty intelligent crowd, consider you hopelessly bound to a point of view that is both redundant in its presentation and lacking in basic supportability and when challenged is defended through childish attacks and regurgitation of so called facts that are at best half truths and more likely out right lies.

We know you think you’re helping but you lost us a long time ago, but now you are heading into Rush Limbaugh territory where you just scream the same crap louder and dress it up with funny graphics or long winded rants, while occasionally trying to bully people out of the conversation. That is not a dialog, that is just mean spirited, and a piece of crap is just fancy shit when dressed up.

There's nothing mysterious about the Labor Departments numbers. The are the same numbers that showed Bush inheriting a 4% unemployment rate that he and the Republican controlled House, Republican Senate and Republican leaning Supreme Court turned into an 8.2% unemployment rate that got as high as 10% during the first few months of Obama's presidency.

Well guess what? I've mentioned this probably dozens of times in many of the political oriented threads, and it's a mere matter of common sense and a basic fundimental intellectual intuition, to know that beginning in late-August to September, hiring spikes for seasonal work. The retail sector is hiring. Manufacturors are hiring. School and educational related facilities/institutions and service are hiring. The service industry is hiring. Traveling industry is hiring for holiday travel.

The last jobs report in a few weeks just before the election WILL be substantially lower than it is now, I predict well below 7.6%. I guarantee it. I also guarantee that Right-Wingnuts everywhere will be crying foul and blame the media, the pollsters and big government, like they always do.

just plain doug wrote:

The nazi party tried to eliminate all jews. Therefore, if you are not a nazi supporter, you must be a jew supporter.There are lots of jews in Israel, and Israel is gearing up to take out Iran, before Iran can take out Israel.Just using your logic in calling all people who disagree with you on health care nazi sympathisers. Your rules, not mine!

American Nazi's, like those from White Supremecist groups, the Tea Party, Ron Paul donors ect ect hate more than just Jews. Look how they treat Obama...

I don't see anybody asking Romney for his birth certificate. Heck. He won't even release his tax forms that show he made most of his money from Chinese sweat shop laborors whose jobs used to belong to American Union shops.

Romney's platform and argument to get elected is like George HW Bush telling us to "Read hius lips...no new taxes", except he raised taxes on the middle class and gave tax cuts to the 1%.

You do realize that most here and I am willing to say this is a pretty intelligent crowd, consider you hopelessly bound to a point of view that is both redundant in its presentation and lacking in basic supportability and when challenged is defended through childish attacks and regurgitation of so called facts that are at best half truths and more likely out right lies.

We know you think you’re helping but you lost us a long time ago, but now you are heading into Rush Limbaugh territory where you just scream the same crap louder and dress it up with funny graphics or long winded rants, while occasionally trying to bully people out of the conversation. That is not a dialog, that is just mean spirited, and a piece of crap is just fancy shit when dressed up.

Plook out!

tweedle-dumb wrote:

There's nothing mysterious about the Labor Departments numbers. The are the same numbers that showed Bush inheriting a 4% unemployment rate that he and the Republican controlled House, Republican Senate and Republican leaning Supreme Court turned into an 8.2% unemployment rate that got as high as 10% during the first few months of Obama's presidency.

ONE. MORE. TIME. FOR. THE. WORLD.:

Clinton signed the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act (The Banking Act of 1933) in 1999. And it definitely contributed to the current Housing Bubble / economic crisis. And hence, this mess wasn't just the fault of bankers, financial institutions or George W. Bush, etc.

tweedle-dumb wrote:

Well guess what? I've mentioned this probably dozens of times in many of the political oriented threads, and it's a mere matter of common sense and a basic fundimental intellectual intuition, to know that beginning in late-August to September, hiring spikes for seasonal work. The retail sector is hiring. Manufacturors are hiring. School and educational related facilities/institutions and service are hiring. The service industry is hiring. Traveling industry is hiring for holiday travel.

No shit, sherlock. Regardless, it was still suspicious since it is the U-3's highest per month growth rate in NINE years. But again, there are STILL 47 million Americans on food stamps now as opposed to the 32 million Americans on food stamps 4 years ago. And the U-6 rate is STILL 14.7%. So, you CANNOT successfully argue the economy has more than slightly improved.

We now return to our regularly scheduled programming so tweedle-dumb can continue denying REALITY...

Denying reality would be your realm disco boy. You can't even vote here. Yet you argue about it in favor of a candidate that can't win?

So what if he "can't" win. As long as the Big Two get the vast majority of votes, they have no reason to change their ideals. If the american voter abandoned his/her fear of supporting a losing party, and voted for the rogue element, then even if the underdog loses, if he got enough votes the Big Two may realise they need to change to get those voters back. AND...don't think in terms of 1 election. If the underdog gets more votes the next election than he got the current election, then that indicates a "trend", and the Big Two will HAVE to change to stop that trend. Votes is all they understand, and fear.

_________________You're probably wondering why I'm here(not that it makes a heck of a lot of a difference to ya)

The idea that a candidate "can't win" is crapropaganda. In a fair election, that which gets the most votes win. The fact is, Americans are so mesmerized by corporate media that they are very suceptable to suggestion...hypnotized as it seems.

A person with integrity votes for what he really wants, even if it means writing-in a candidate, or voting third party. This contention that voting for the winning candidate means the voter "wins" is pure fabricated media horseshit. A lot of people woke up to this fact after they voted for the current pResident, and found that "change we can believe in" was just that...faith...which in much of America means trusting in that which is not true.

...and after these voters discovered this, Ron Paul gained a lot more support from former Democratic faithful. Believe what you want about what is possible, but it is not impossible that Ron Paul could be wrote-in, or that Gary Johnson could split the vote.

That would be, of course, if the election was fair and above-board, which it isn't.

Denying reality would be your realm disco boy. You can't even vote here. Yet you argue about it in favor of a candidate that can't win?

So what if he "can't" win. As long as the Big Two get the vast majority of votes, they have no reason to change their ideals. If the american voter abandoned his/her fear of supporting a losing party, and voted for the rogue element, then even if the underdog loses, if he got enough votes the Big Two may realise they need to change to get those voters back. AND...don't think in terms of 1 election. If the underdog gets more votes the next election than he got the current election, then that indicates a "trend", and the Big Two will HAVE to change to stop that trend. Votes is all they understand, and fear.

I've bemoaned the two-party system here for over 20 years. I've voted for third party choices and would again.As much as I don't like them, their usefulness is at last over with this election.2016 will go to the highest bidder regardless of party. So, gentlemen, start your engines.

Solutions?Repeal Citizens United case...limit fees that tv, radio, newspaper, internet can charge for political ads without limiting any other fee for other kinds of ad...let the chips fall where they may

None of this matters as the only real fact thats pertinant is that Republicans lose jobs and Democrats create jobs. History is repeating itself yet again, regardless of what some shmucks from Canada are whining about. I don't believe that all Canadians are shmucks, but a couple here are definitely doing their damndest to prove me wrong, thats assuming that Disco Isaac actually lives up there and not down in Douchebagistan Florida at the local Kmart.

Regardless...the jobs numbers will be even better by the next report just before the election, as they always do this time of year

None of this matters as the only real fact thats pertinant is that Republicans lose jobs and Democrats create jobs. History is repeating itself yet again, regardless of what some shmucks from Canada are whining about. I don't believe that all Canadians are shmucks, but a couple here are definitely doing their damndest to prove me wrong, thats assuming that Disco Isaac actually lives up there and not down in Douchebagistan Florida at the local Kmart.

If you mean my post, don't be so full of yourself. No names are mentioned in my post because it is directed at those who complain about both parties.If you are happy with your choice, that's great. It's the "lesser of two evils" people who need to change how they express their displeasure.

If you weren't referring to my post, then sorry...my bad, your insults were rather open to misunderstanding.

_________________You're probably wondering why I'm here(not that it makes a heck of a lot of a difference to ya)

Denying reality would be your realm disco boy. You can't even vote here. Yet you argue about it in favor of a candidate that can't win?

So what if he "can't" win. As long as the Big Two get the vast majority of votes, they have no reason to change their ideals. If the american voter abandoned his/her fear of supporting a losing party, and voted for the rogue element, then even if the underdog loses, if he got enough votes the Big Two may realise they need to change to get those voters back. [/quote]

You mean like after we had Ross Perot's candidacy, we got George W. Bush? Now there was a man with ideals - I just didn't like them very much myself.

_________________"I have learned from my mistakes, and I am sure I can repeat them exactly."

Denying reality would be your realm disco boy. You can't even vote here. Yet you argue about it in favor of a candidate that can't win?

So what if he "can't" win. As long as the Big Two get the vast majority of votes, they have no reason to change their ideals. If the american voter abandoned his/her fear of supporting a losing party, and voted for the rogue element, then even if the underdog loses, if he got enough votes the Big Two may realise they need to change to get those voters back. .

You mean like after we had Ross Perot's candidacy, we got George W. Bush? Now there was a man with ideals - I just didn't like them very much myself.

Jeezus, Caputh. Learn to use the quote function properly. You have me saying things other people said! (so I fixed it)

_________________You're probably wondering why I'm here(not that it makes a heck of a lot of a difference to ya)

Denying reality would be your realm disco boy. You can't even vote here. Yet you argue about it in favor of a candidate that can't win?

So what if he "can't" win. As long as the Big Two get the vast majority of votes, they have no reason to change their ideals. If the american voter abandoned his/her fear of supporting a losing party, and voted for the rogue element, then even if the underdog loses, if he got enough votes the Big Two may realise they need to change to get those voters back. .

You mean like after we had Ross Perot's candidacy, we got George W. Bush? Now there was a man with ideals - I just didn't like them very much myself.

thx doug!

Caputh: after Perot's run we got Clinton. Some say Perot helped split the R vote. But Slick Willy will tell ye that he split the southern vote. And the result was a Dem that largely sold out the unions for bigger backers. As they are commonly understood. Now they won't even tell you their names...

Sorry, Doug, my wife was distracting me as only she knows how!Simplex - you're right - we did get Clinton. But Perot's candidacy in 92 and 96 contributed IMO to the growth of the Neocon movement in the Republican Party; as Doug indicates 3rd party candidates do have an effect, particularly if they're relatively successful. However, the results are not necessarily to everyone's satisfaction.

_________________"I have learned from my mistakes, and I am sure I can repeat them exactly."

Denying reality would be your realm disco boy. You can't even vote here. Yet you argue about it in favor of a candidate that can't win?and 'Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose'...

I guess you haven't read very many of my posts? Because I've stated numerous times that the reason why I keep up with US politics is that it obviously affects the WORLD, not just the US. And also, if Ron Paul really couldn't have won, the GOP/RNC wouldn't have fucked him over and changed the rules at the last minute, genius...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum